NESS TECHNOLOGY (I) P.LTD, MUMBAI V. DCIT CC 6(1), MUMBAI

MA 45/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5622 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 29-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: K
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAURABH G DESH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH K , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD , JUDICIAL MEMBER M A NO. 45 /MUM/201 7 ( ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 1006 / MUM /201 6 ) : (A.Y : 20 1 1 - 1 2 ) M/S. NESS TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, UNIT 501, INTERFACE, NEW LINK ROAD, MALAD (W), MUMBAI 400 064. PAN : AA ACA9649L (APPLICANT) VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 6( 1 ) , MUMBAI (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI M.P. LOHIA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SAURABH G. DESHPANDE DATE OF HEARING : 29 / 12 /201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 / 12 /201 7 O R D E R PER G.S. PANNU , AM : THE CAPTIONED MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 SEEKING RECTIFICATION OF AN ERROR APPARENT ON RECORD IN ORDER DATED 11.11.2016 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES APPEAL BEARING ITA NO. 1006/MUM/2016. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT AN ERROR HAS CREPT IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND DREW OUR ATTENTIO N TO PARA 9 TO 9.4 OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER WHEREIN THE 2 MA NO. 45/MUM/2017 M/S. NESS TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. COMPARABILITY OF INFOSYS LTD. HAS BEEN DISCUSSED. IT WAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT WHILE CONCLUDING THE SAID COMPARABILITY, IN PARA 9.5 OF THE ORDER INADVERTENTLY IT IS STATED THAT E - INFOCHIPS LIMITED BE EXCLUDED AS A COMPARABLE INSTEAD OF INFOSYS LIMITED. THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE PRAYED THAT IT WAS AN ERROR APPARENT ON THE RECORD AND PRAYED THAT THE TRIBUNAL MAY PASS AN ORDER RECTIFYING THE SAID MISTAKE. 3. THE LD. DR APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE DI D NOT RAISE ANY OBJECTION TO THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE PERUSED PARA 9 TO 9. 5 OF OUR ORDER DATED 11.11.2016 AND FIND THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE TO BE CORRECT AND ACCORDINGLY, DIRECT THAT INFOSYS LIMITED BE READ IN THE PLACE OF E - INFOCHIPS LIMITED IN PARA 9.5 OF OUR ORDER. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. THE ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 29 TH DECEMBER, 2017. SD/ - SD/ - ( RAVISH SOOD ) JUDICIAL MEMBER (G.S. PANNU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE : 2 9 T H DECEMBER, 2017 3 MA NO. 45/MUM/2017 M/S. NESS TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, K BENCH, MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T, MUMBAI